Tata Motors Ltd. vs The State of Jharkhand

Petitioner nos. 1 and 2 who are defendant nos. 3 and 4 respectively in Partition Suit No. 27 of 2001 have joined one of the legal heirs and successors of defendant no. 2 as petitioner no. 3 and filed this writ petition on 15.01.2009 challenging order dated 18.09.2008, whereby amendment in the written statement has been declined by the trial Judge.

There are as many as 35 defendants in the suit, out of which defendant nos. 2 to 5 have filed joint written statement. Defendant Nos. 6 to 8 are also contesting defendants, and defendant nos. 9 to 35 are the purchasers who have purchased part of suit properties from the co-sharers. During pendency of the suit defendant no. 2 died and in his place his two sons, one daughter and wife were substituted. There are six persons who are plaintiffs in the partition suit. Except the plaintiffs none of the parties to the suit have been made parties in the present proceeding, not even other legal heirs of defendant no. 2. Obviously, they could not have been issued notice and served in the present proceeding. In the meantime wife of defendant no. 2 who along with her two sons and daughter was substituted in the partition suit namely, Ambalika Devi has also died on 03.11.2012.

By an order dated 29.07.2009 this Court directed the trial court not to finally dispose of Partition Suit No. 27 of 2001.

In support of this writ petition the petitioner no. 1 has filed his affidavit.

In view of the aforesaid facts, prima-facie, the petitioner no.1 namely, Ambika Singh, son of late Laxmi Singh appears to have committed contempt of this Court and he is liable to be proceeded against under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Accordingly, in exercise of powers under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Rule 392 and Rule 393 of High Court of Jharkhand Rules 2001, the Registry is directed to issue notice to the petitioner no. 1, why a proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 be not initiated against him.

Whether or not notice should also be issued against the learned counsel who has filed the writ petition shall be decided on the next date of hearing.

Post the matter on 09.02.2018.